Volume 5, Number 2
Apr 1981

Priorities In Library and Archival
Conservation

by Ellen McCrady

In recent years a number of people and organizations have
advocated policies and programs to advance the conservation of
library and archival materials. Each advocated program has much
merit, but differs from the rest in the importance it assigns to the
various elements in each program.

Last May there was a colloquium at the University of Maryland on
"Funding and Identifying Priorities in Archival and Library
Conservation," at which the participants expressed agreement on some
major points, and disagreement on others. Those points of view are
presented schematically below in order to facilitate comparison, and
the positions of two individuals and three other organizations are
added in, to provide context. All but one of these positions (the At
Report) have been written in the last 3 years. Immediately after
each need in the list are the abbreviations for the sources (people,
organizations or publications) that have put it forward as a need.
Most of the sources are organizations, simply because individuals do
not often go to the trouble of working out a coherent statement of
what the field needs. Sources defining a particular entry as a top
priority are circled, thus: (W)

Some sources named only a few needs. NEH and NHPRC have limited
funds, yet they want to put significant sums where those sums can do
the most good--so they limit the number of their priorities. The
NCAC's discussion paper on a national institute for conservation
(NIC) was restricted to functions that it considered appropriate for
a national institute to fill.

A very comprehensive list, on the other hand, was compiled from
the report of NCAC's Study Committee on Libraries and Archives.
Another long list, the most recently compiled, came from the Western
States Materials Conservation Project, now renamed the Western
Conservation Congress.

The technical constituency is underrepresented, despite the
inclusion of two bench-oriented conservators (McCrady and Dean) in
the list. Scientists' viewpoints are not represented at all, except
to the extent that they are members of AIC, recipients of NHPRC
grants, and so on. This is not to say that they do not have
opinions; there are simply no organizations of conservation
scientists as such, through which they can speak and be heard.

Another omission is the National Preservation Program, as
presented by attendees at a planning conference in December 1976 at
the Library of Congress. When the proceedings were published
recently, it seemed at first that this conference and its program
could be added to the lists but soon it became apparent that the
attendees did not speak with a single voice, since no formal
resolutions or set of recommendations were issued. A summary of that
conference, in a form comparable to this, has been scheduled for a
future issue.

It should be noted that the absence of a particular source
notation (e.g. "NEH" or "W") after a priority does not necessarily
mean that the source considers the activity trivial. Probably it
means only that the source does not see a critical need for a
change in the way the activity has been going on or
developing; or the activity nay be perceived as a desirable result,
rather than a central cause, within the whole complex situation.

Although many of the listed priorities overlap in meaning, little
attempt has been made to combine them because this would have meant
doing violence to the original concepts. The original wording has
been preserved wherever practical.

Because all sources had an opportunity to correct or change the
listings before this article went to press, there nay not be perfect
correspondence between their needs as expressed here and as
expressed in the printed sources cited.

The following abbreviations are used for the sources:

arl=

"Preparation of Detailed Specifications for a
National System for the Preservation of Library Materials," by
Warren J. Haas. Washington, D.C.: Association of Research Libraries,
Feb. 1972. Final report of Project No. 0-8004, Contract No.
OEG-3-70- 0021 (506), for U.S. Office of Education; sometimes
referred to as "The Haas Report.".

dean=

John Dean, Collections Maintenance Officer at the
Milton Eisenhower Library, Johns Hopkins University, as he expressed
himself on the panel in the University of Maryland colloquium. Other
panelists were Larry Hackman (NHPRC), Margaret Child (NEH) and David
Shute (NCAC).

L&a=

"Report of the Study Committee on Libraries and
Archives," by the National Conservation Advisory Council,
1978.

National Endowment for the Humanities, Research
Programs Division, as represented by Margaret Child in May 1980 at
the University of Maryland.

nhprc=

National Historical Publications and Records
Commission, as represented by Larry Hackman in May 1980 at the
University of Maryland.

nic=

"Discussion Paper on a [Proposed] National
Institute for Conservation of Cultural Property," National
Conservation Advisory Council, 1978.

w=

Western States Materials Conservation Project,
Memorandum of June 30, 1980, to Feasibility Colloquium participants
and others.

Margaret Child wrote in to say, after looking over an earlier
draft of the list below, "I would also suggest that it is limiting
to confine one's scope to the written record, especially if
by that you mean print. [Earlier drafts of this article were titled,
"Priorities in Conservation of America's Written Record."] There is
also a great need to preserve information in other
media--manuscripts & archives, films, photographs, sound
recordings, videotapes, magnetic tapes--all are important records of
our society and will increasingly play a larger role in documenting
our activities."

John Dean responded to the sane draft with the following
comments: "We do not have to decide on either apprenticeship
training or conservation education 'a la Banks,' but there is every
reason to have both. Having both, there must be flexibility within
training systems to permit technicians to gravitate into
administration (by adding the necessary education), and
administrators to transfer to the bench (with the appropriate period
of internship). There seems to be such a clamor, by some
conservators, to cloak conservation in some kind of academic
respectability; a craving for professorial status. I have tried to
encourage the notion of national standards in terms of all training,
which does not really mean the conferring of an academic degree. As
we all know, academic degrees do not guarantee competence or even a
given standard. Formal apprenticeship; academic training; workshops
and seminars; internships and staff exchange; conferences;
publications; consortia; are all extremely important and must be
pursued all at once."

1. Surveys, Study and Planning Projects

a. Development of guidelines for surveys - L&A, W, NEH

b. Standard terminology, to facilitate interinstitutional
surveys - W

c. Surveys of needs - NEH, L&A, NHPRC

2. Recruitment, Education, Training

a. Establishment and enforcement of standards:

Accreditation of apprenticeships (McC)

Accreditation of schools - L&A

Professional organization sets accreditation standards, state
enforces them - NIC

c. Training for technicians (Note: The word "technician" is used
by some writers to mean anybody and everybody on the continuum of
skill from library age to book or paper conservator) Dean, NEH, W,
(McC) At, NIC

c. Open up the channels of communication between scientists and
practitioners; pay explicit attention to the problem of applying the
findings of the scientists and keeping the scientists aware of the
practitioners' information needs - L&A, McC,(NEH))

d. Compile a documentation of the best of current practice - McC

e. Directories of resource persons, materials, etc. -(W),
NEH

f. Current-awareness services (abstracts, indices, etc.) -
L&A, W

g. Videotapes and slide shows - L&A, W

h. Self-study aids -W, (NEH)

i. A central repository of information - NIC, (W) NEH

j. Regional information clearinghouse - (W)

k. A library of conservation literature - NIC

l. An information service - NIC

m. Information retrieval service for records of examination and
treatment and for conservation data -NIC

n. On-site consultation service - NIC

o. More books and monographs, instead of short journal articles
- McC

p. A newsletter - W

q. Publish research results - NIC

r. Publish standards for testing materials - NIC

s Publish results of conservation projects, telling what works
where and why - NHPRC, NEH

t. Annual or other regular summaries of research and
application, to circulate to relevant administrators - At

4. Scientific and Technical Aspects

a. Establishment and/or enforcement of standards:

Testing of materials in conservation; quality control - NIC

Uniform performance standards - ARL

tandards and guidelines for microforms (this need is now partly
filled) - NHPRC

d. National funding programs should insist that individual
collections not acquire more than they can maintain properly - NHPRC

e. Preventive conservation at all levels from the national down
to the repository (i.e., not taking or keeping something without
good reason; not attributing value to original format without good
reason; and selling material whose only value is monetary)-
(NHPRC)